A reply to Mr. Peter Stanislaw

Mr. Peter said the following about my blog on George Bush and some comments I had made!


Thanks for the commentary on a blog that sees little save for blog spam and my father's angry-white-guy rantings, but George Bush has done more for the proliferation of terror than the eradication of it. Those who claim this resource consolidation/market expansion/petrodollar assurance war is a War On Terror don't believe it for a minute, so that makes you and your ilk dupes, doesn't it? At this point in my world, support for BushCo can only be seen as a character flaw. No offense, Mr. Rajesh.The world needs solutions to problems that don't involve mass murder, and your cavalier acceptance of BushCo's methodology, as well as your reverence for the man himself, tends to make me love Ms. Roy all the more.Do you reject collectivism out of hand? Are all socialists misguided? Is there nothing to be gleaned from their continued striving to put the wretched of the earth before profits? Isn't social equity a desirable goal?Of course it is, in my world.

My reply to him is this!

I think Mr. Peter Stanislaw has got it wrong. It’s both about the world as he sees it and of course about me.

The point was about anti G.B’s protests in India, the fact and fiction behind it.

Coming to George Bush, you must first understand that I am not an American and hence do not view these contemporary actions of your president through an American prism and perspective. As an American (I am note sure about your race, lineage, affiliations etc) you are entitled to view the past and present that might be a product of your upbringing, your local history and many more things. There is nothing wrong in that. But my views are not to be taken in your context.

Talking about all those values, I am of the opinion that if there was indeed any body who did conceive of a world that as per your words would not involve mass murder, prejudice, and imperialistic overbearing on small nations, it was Mahatma Gandhi. He was one living example that thought and did the same thing, which was non-violence or Ahimsa in Hindi.

World has always run by persons who exerted power. Not the intellectual variety but the brutal one. Such power mongers, you like it or not were at the helm atleast in the most part of the history.

There were moderators of course. These were flowers who bloomed once in a while and told the world that we humans are certainly capable of better things. A few examples apart from Mahatma Gandhi were Thomas Paine, Voltaire and many more (sorry that my examples are all men as we had made sure for so long that women do not speak out). They made the difference by showing how this world and society can be run by adopting methods that would cause the least injury to fellow humans. Not only that, such men made every one know that there are some inalienable rights every human should posses and that those should be give ample opportunity to be exhibited.

This result of all this is the world we now live in. The last half a century has exposed the folly of what we were doing all along, like the kings and bishops thinking that they had inalienable rights to say how the whole thing should work.

The last decade and a half fine-tuned the whole process by exposing those who claimed to have exposed the king run countries and had ending up molding themselves on the same lines. I am talking about the communist run countries whose legacies have been thoroughly discredited.

Now we are at a stage of realizing that decency and dignity of human life could never be compromised for anything else, specifically in the process of creating and distributing wealth, running societies and imparting education.


Now lets see how this is not done or how specifically you find out a way to stop such indignity happening.

Men or not God and this world is not a place where justice prevails. Hence its up to the courageous individual to defy and establish the truth. Galileo might have recanted before the papal commission yet he became one of the pioneers in rubbishing the Church’s claim on its self-declared divinity. Thomas Paine wrote his rights of men and Gandhi his theory of non-violence.

The courageous thus spawned more of their kind in return they did their best in reducing the ill effects of authoritarianism or in many cases the authoritarianism itself.

One should not forget that slave mentality was a part and parcel of ancient populations. It’s the chief, the priest and the medicine man that were required to think. Hence an original from any society became a rarity. He was either branded as a heretic and driven off or if he claims a critical mass of followers adds a bit of rationality to that culture or society in which this had happened. Newton, Darwin, Karl Marx are few examples of such.

Compared to every century the rationalism of humans has been increasing. Europe doesn’t invent witches and burn them any more and hospitals are places where humans go in case of sickness and not to an exorcist.

It doesn’t any more take a Voltaire or Paine to say what’s cruel and what’s not. Any sensible one in this century can do that. Earlier the standards of the men that preached morality seemed very high. This obviously was because the average citizens view and place in the society was very low. These men of courage can but stand only in high pedestals.

As I just said now, the situation is lot lot different now.

That’s exactly the whole point!

Bush preaches morality although he his considered by most as a cheap politician. It might be true. His politics may be cheap and so might be his actions. But that does not in any way makes it wrong for a person to talk about world peace and human rights. If any one of us does it might look the same. Being an American who knows the background fully, you are in no position to accept this. In my case I have divorced myself from this fact and looked only into the aspects and results of things done. It’s now a different picture for me!

The other point is also so obvious. Saddam Hussein, Kim-Il-Sung and other such persons are also of a unique breed in this century but in a negative sense. A Mullah run country where the single biggest export after oil is only ideological indoctrination, is also one that is unique in the same negative sense.

Here we see a world population, which for the first time in its history has tuned itself to a degree of mental stability by freeing to certain extent from religious bigotry and racial prejudice. Yes, maturity as an aspect had always been there. The world population has been trading and doing things meaning which maturity had been in place in such constructive work but not in looking at why other humans are so.

All along the Christians had the opinion that other religions were the Devils manifestation (some still do but that’s a different subject and requires a new write up). Muslims bettered them by undertaking direct action against others. Eugenics was considered as a proof of white man’s superiority and Darwinism was almost perverted by Herbert Spencer to something called Social Darwinism, just to prove that it was the superior race’s right to destroy the inferior.

In this current age, most of us now do not prescribe to such nonsense since rational thought process has certainly taken root and modern education and science has entrenched deeply.

Yet a few animals like the Assad clan and Kim-Il-Sung are still standing. It’s surprising that people should praise these creatures as leaders. Just a closer look will tell one that those unfortunate people actually do not praise their leader but are paralyzed with fear into not acting against. If a Gandhi or a Thomas Paine had evolved in these societies most certainly they would have been thrown to the lions and this is no exaggeration.

Looking at this broadly, then who else would restrain such depots?

UN has a very limited capacity as every one knows. The next immediate neighbor that gets affected is the next natural candidate that has the moral right to hit back. This also cannot happen, as they too might be scared. If I am the neighbor and yet do not have the resources to hit back, I start looking at some one who can do that as a savior.

Here again the point to be noted is that branding one as a despot is not done on somebody whom you just don’t like. Coming to a conclusion about ones authoritarian characteristics or that a rule is despotic is a result of clear evidence and analysis. If a leader gases a thousand of his own people and there is clear evidence to prove that then he is a one to be despised.

Going to the previous point, given a minimum number of capable retaliating or should I say correcting factors, a fair minded man or woman looks at the most possible lesser evil that would do the job. Clearly a democratic governments action on such matter is more desirable than any other alternative.

Since we do not see the possibility of God, who theoretically should be faultless and whose action can be anything but injustice, acting, we might need some one, the next best possible or should I say the least undemocratic to carry the task forward.

If the question is legitimacy, which no doubt is not, the formers action is extremely culpable than the latter. That’s exactly where a sane person makes a decision.

In Iraq’s case, the illegitimate act of invading a country was a result of what I call as the nil alternatives to Godly action. For an atheist it should be defined as the result of nil alternatives to a reasonable just reaction by the victims themselves.

The ball doesn’t stop here. The alternative action provider is more vulnerable than the ousted or to be ousted depot, not by his insecurity but by the inevitability of the voting power of people like you! This cannot be better. The ouster can be ousted any time through thoroughly democratic means.

The question of reverence to Bush or any of the leaders that are democratically elected and functioning doesn’t even arise, as a democratic leader’s actions are not his alone in the first place!

An upheaval in a despot ruled state, in most cases, could be caused only by the despot. If you are familiar with Soviet history, it was Stalin that moved the engine. Men like Beria and Yezhov were simply his creatures and hence the spokes but the poor population on whom such upheavals were loaded were mere cogs.

I think I have said enough about certain basic things that drive this world. Please understand that this is not Eden or some equivalent place where one can see things in black and white. Earth has always been a tough place for us since the time we started of in the African savannas. The last two thousand years of recorded history has suggested that it had been really a tough task for maintaining justice by various cultures and societies. The problem was that, the justice as such was interpreted differently once you cross every hundred miles. Only in this century and last were some agreements reached on what justice is. It will take maybe another century or two before injustice is also defined along with the qualities that should be possessed by the Injustice ender!

Till then Bush’s and others are needed to keep the Husseins in check!

Talking about your personnel beliefs about collectivism, we are again talking about process that generally are against the basic human nature. I am certainly not hinting that Humans are basically animals and hence would continue in that fashion and that altruism is all bull.

The problem with ideologies is that there is no set ideology that is there in this world that is inherent. As Richard Dawkins says, our universe is a place which is heartless, pitless and without any feeling. Given the situation, pronouncing of a thought process that seeks to impose that and this, ends up with non-conformities and hence deviations and finally to failure. Yes capitalism is also a method and pronouncement. But the alternatives laid down such as socialism, communism, swadeshism (Ghandian socialism) are a bit more dogmatic than plain simple capitalism.

Capitalism being the most stupid and simple, draws the people towards it more than the others and hence looks like the least difficult way for some one to make a living. Collectivism, again, requires lot of mental resilience, sacrifice and withdrawal. Except for the kibbutz of Israelis and many of the religious groups that run communities, collectivism could only be of a forced nature and hence doomed to fail. Hence a difficult proposition. I love to see the world where empathy and hence self sacrifice shall rule. I also love to see Santa Claus dropping down to give Christmas presents to all children of the world. A sane person will know both of the above shall never happen.

A misguided socialist is another misnomer. Somebody thinking about utopia is certainly not misguided. But the problem is how? The how again takes the shape of ones whims and ends up as perversion. Peronism, Trotskyism etc dint go anywhere. Here I am talking about the economics of the socialist. If its about the other aspects in the country where socialists tend have interests, it’s a different discussion altogether.

As for me, I do not in any way subscribe to any of the other interests of Bush in USA, namely creation science nonsense, anti abortion stance etc, which will make one typical white, southern American think that I am a leftist.

World is an imperfect place and the perfection we see is only relative. The least perfect when it goes towards destruction, becomes the imperfection and hence needs to be replaced, not by the perfect, which actually doesn’t exist, but by the least imperfect!

Voyage into the Mediterranean countries with Paul Theroux

It’s the second one of Paul Theroux that I am reading. It was back sometime in 2004 that I had the read through the Dark Safari – Paul’s journey from Cairo to Cape Town. Undoubtedly one of the most fascinating contemporary documentary about eastern Africa.

This time it was about the happenings in Mediterranean, as Paul sees it. Only that this was written in the early nineties, which means that I had to adjust my continuously time sensitive perspective of all worldly events to suit the decade gap.

But it seems most of the things might not have changed much. Except for the communication revolution through the net and the cheap mobile networks that make every one to be in touch with every thing, the base line is much the same.

I could make out that Palestine, Israel, Albania and many more are much the same today as it was a decade ago.

Paul’s jottings about people capture just that. Well, people are always people. Agreed. Nevertheless, the enormity of the attitude differences between various cultures if untouched by the increase of prosperity seems to have always been preserved. Well this is not just a materialistic statement. The point is that the basic living model in any society more or less begins to fit to a pattern amidst affluence. A society’s legitimate protection mechanism of its prosperity attained by legitimate means in a law abiding environment eventually seem to match with a similar one in a different culture. Such a mechanism in both the acquiring and as well as the protection activities have started defining life.

This was not a case a century ago or even a quarter century ago. Accumulation was undertaken and viewed in different ways in different societies. Except for the affluent western powers and in some democratic pockets like India, legitimacy in accumulation was a factor that was available only in minimum. Most of the big wealth and its trickle down had considerable illegitimacy embossed inside.

With the spread of universally acceptable and implemented trade and labor laws, export of universally specified goods with equivalent standards the whole process of gaining prosperity has become more credible. No longer individual wealth is dependent upon the states whims and shortages. The making of wealth by the individual has ceased to be the prerogative of the state.

With such being the situation, an individual’s life goals and hence the living pattern to achieve or at least travel toward that goal seems be falling into a similar pattern irrespective of the culture or the society they live in. This process, which already has started, is gaining momentum by the day and maybe in two decades from now, if at all there are no atomic wars, there will truly be a big assembly of global citizens. However at this point this had not happened and in the nineties it just started to flex.
Albania had always been an enigma of a country for me. Being a Muslim enclave of Europe and complemented only by Turkey in its faith or should I say race, as Albania was an officially atheist state, I used to wonder how this second sick man of Europe managed to survive with the likes of Enver Hoxa (pronounced as Hodja) in the helm. It was indeed in shambles, as one would have expected any communist state would have been. The skeletons tumbled out once the notorious Hoxa and his clan disappeared from the scene. If not for the same faith of the populace, Albania would have been another Yugoslavia, split into the Turkic Muslim and the Slavic Christian enclaves with hatred running very deep and never to be reconciled ever again.

Paul goes through the motions of a traveler in the blind and wounded state of Albania, as someone trying to see light in midst of an undeniable despair. It’s not only wounds but also a systematic brutality inflicted on a population by a clan of Psychopaths that had shut all avenues for the light to fall in. The more he digs into the Albanian mind, the more the depth of the damage he can see. A set of people, violated in total in all respects, in mind, in body and in spirit, never again able to find their feet, would be the definition for an Albanian.

I read long ago that Albania became a protectorate of China once Krushev and his cohort’s punctured Stalin’s halo and tried to re-define world communism. As every one now knows, starting from Mao, all the other monstrous incarnations of Stalin in various Soviet satellites could never digest their beloved getting trashed. The lovely Stalin, the leader of all mankind, an icon for Mao and Hoxa was suddenly a nobody. Not only that. The nobody was now a deviant from real Marxism and Leninism. This was blasphemy to Mao and Hoxa and probably many others. The very symbol of these dictators legitimacy in grinding the poor population of their respective countries was dissolved on a good day in 1956 by the Chairman’s outpourings. Now the whole affair, which every one knew was true, quite some time ago, came out in the open. The next day Mao and others knew what would follow if this were reconciled to. It would not take much time for Mao’s minions to form the same opinion. Hence it was the Chinese communism, which was touted as the real pallbearer to Marxist, Leninist and Stalinist ideological dialectic. Mao started defining the real communism to many a new communist movement whose leashes were not with Soviet Russia. This continued at least till Stalin was resurrected, albeit in a small way by Brezhnev and gang. Hoxa, a product of Stalinism became a will full compound in the hands of the Maoists. No doubt the country that this dangerous crackpot presided over could do no better than him. Poor Albanians.

Paul then peeks into Syria. Another wonderful place for freedom and human rights. In Albania the ruling Psychopaths were from the Hoxa’a clan. In Syria it was Azzad’s clan. Now that Hafiz Azzad is no more, the enterprise is run by his son, obviously in the same lines.

Egypt was another place. Inspite of its radical Islamic brotherhood groups, there seems to exist a good percentage of sensible and non-fanatical Arabs.

The journey continues…….

ON LONDON BOMBINGS - IF THE VICTIM IS NOT US!

This simply sums up the happenings.

I meant the London Bombings -Without doubt a horrific act perpetrated on innocent people. A totally un-excusable act of murder and mayhem unleashed on ordinary and unsuspecting population. My heart felt condolences to the families of every one of them who lost their lives and were injured and are suffering immeasurably.

Condolences are pouring in from all quarters. Quite naturally the condemnations from sections that can be associated with the faith of the perpetrators have been coming in quickly. Without seeing who and what, I take a quick guess that Pakistan and its satellite associations in UK would have lent their fullest testimony as to how this cannot be Islam and whoever had done this has nothing to do with what their religion says.

By this time, I take a guess again; the apologist should have started working in full force trying to establish rationale and reasons, if not subtle justifications for this horrific act. Possessing the requite language skills (after all this is England) and of course a sack full of intellectual clay which can be modified as pleased, the justification warriors would be in full swing.

But this time seems to be an exception. The Holy Father of British communication – The BBC and other allies, who otherwise see a good amount of correctness in such acts when perpetrated on dark colored and non Christian peoples, seem to cry from top. It’s a cry of the fallen and hurt. A cry of the innocent whose blood has been spattered in the most brutal fashion.

When your blood spills in your own land by the act of a group that is committed to destroy you and your land, the first you will do is to cry. The cry turns into hurt and then into shame and then into self piety and then you think of revenge. Never the mind goes into seeing a rationale immediately. After all nobody sees correctness when your own family is murdered in cold blood!

Now the BBC and Britons know what it is to be hit. Now they know how easy it is for somebody to take their lives and limbs. Now they know that the Mullahs war cry is not a lullaby. Now they know that a justification for such brutality cannot be anything but a perverse and sadistic incantation. Now they know how much it will hurt if someone justifies such acts, whatever the rationale might be.

Dear Briton, hope you would have understood that one should first worry about the cancer and its manifestation in their body rather than justifying its origination due to factors. The cells become cancerous for so many reasons. Instead of attacking and terminating the cancerous cells if one starts condemning their own self, there can be nothing more ridiculous than that. How would it be if we let the cancer grow by justifying that they are nothing but misguided cells which hopefully will come back to the right path? How will it be when someone starts a sermon to you on these lines? How will it be when some one calls the cancer cells and asks it to give its opinion on why the man hates it? Not stopping at that how will it be to feel when some one is also keen to find a good justification as to why the man and the cancer cell are in this condition in the first place and finally in the keenness to prove ones intellectual and cultural superiority and relegate the fight between the man and the cancer cell to that of a clash between less developed entities, how will it be if he tries to end with a balance which is something like; Yes there is a problem, but the cancer cell has got its own rights as compared to the man’s.

Thus crimes were desensitized, trivialized and closed with a verdict that you guys deserve it as these guys have reasons!

“Thus we justify the cancerous cell! – IF THE VICTIM IS NOT US!”

– Thus speaks the British establishment! (At least till the day before the bombings)


How many times the BBC and other British establishments try to strike a balance between the terrorist attack at several places and the terrorists themselves? How many interviews of such immoral men were done in your media, not with a purpose of sensationalism (just like an American magazine doing an interview with Al-Capone) but with an intention of proving that the other side has reasons to use the ammunition on innocents who happened to be, as I said earlier, non white and non Christian population.

Just an inventory of such groups in UK and the way they view terrorism will prove the point. Talking about inventory, all such killer groups, that have killed innocent non white people by terrorist act in the name of freedom, Jihad etc, find place in England and also audience in BBC at one time or another. Kashmiri Jihadi groups and the now almost extinct Khalistani (Sihk Fundamentallist) groups are just a few examples. Talking about the British view on terrorism, even now, as per London, the power hungry Robert Mugabe (certainly a tyrant) was a bigger threat to world peace than General Musharaf and his Islamic cronies in Pakistan.

The reason why this is so is pretty clear!

Mr. Mugabe and his gang torched the houses of quite a few people and drove them out of the country side and took over their property. In this process a few were killed.

Down here in the subcontinent Mr. Mushraff and his gang have the habit of planting bombs and killing hundreds of innocent’s right from Kashmir in the North to Kanyakumari in the south and also embark on adventures like bombing Indian parliament building, Temples and other places. Added to this, the gang operates well known cells that train all sorts of Jihadi elements, funded by Saudia Arabia among others, to indoctrinate all possible and send them on missions to put the fear of God among innocent people who in most of the cases do not belong to their faith. Also the gang has an enormous interest in transferring, or putting it in the right way, stealing and smuggling A- Bomb making technologies throughout the Islamic world.

Now coming to the point as to why Mugabe is a greater threat to world peace than Musharaff, is that the victims of the former atrocity have been the white and Christian people and the latter; non white and non Christian

The British Establishment that is used to justifying murderous tyrants and activities of deformed societies like that of Pakistan are now in a dilemma. The victims this time have been their own people and that too in their own land. Now that their own back yard is swarming with such mutants, it would be interesting to see whether they would be analyzing the merits and demerits of such lunatics as they do when a Pakistani trained and funded Jihadi blows up a convoy of innocent and non combatant Indians or simply hammer them out of existence.

Lets wait see what the lessons of cancer have thought them.

Repeat – Heart felt condolences and sympathies for those unfortunate many that fell prey to the religious bigotry and hatred of a few.



-----End-----